Tongkatali.org - Optimal relationships and a comfortable death instead of God

By Serge Kreutz

I understand that some people are somehow religious, not because they would genuinely believe in the existence of a god, but rather because they feel that life is meaningless without something to believe in that transcends one’s own life. Fear of dying and death plays a major role, too.

They have a vague idea of a god (just as the one propagated by Einstein) as an obscure entity beyond the scientific universe, or as a common soul, or as an indifferent common good.

All of that is of course nonsense, and the fact that Albert Einstein was a genius in the field of physics doesn’t make him an authority on religion and philosophy, just as Sigmund Freud was no authority on engineering, and Pablo Picasso would never have been the right person to get advice from on dental surgery.

But I am aware that many people need something to hold on when their mind wanders to questions such as why do we exist, and what are we living for. Or when fear of dying and death creeps in.

Some of my articles are a sort-of catechism on the topic, but I also can summarize it as a mantra:

We live to have relationships of optimal love and relationships, and, if possible, to have a comfortable death.

Good health and sufficient intelligence are prerequisites for optimal love and relationships, so I have not included them as separate items.

A comfortable death is a widely underestimated philosophical or scientific concern, even though it is an essential aspect in piety and the propagation of religious beliefs. Most non-religious people are so preoccupied with living optimally that their dying often is a terrible crash.

Or, if they realize their fear of dying and death, they suddenly turn to religions.

In order to de-substantiate religious nonsense, the philosophy and science of modern societies ought to deal with the topics of dying and death.

Dying can be a horrifying experience, full of panic and pain (see youtube here). But nobody lives through it to tell other people just how horrifying it can be.

Belief in a god, and praying, probably makes dying more bearable, but at the price of abandoning reason. And not everybody can lull himself in lies.

I advocate that modern, atheistic societies offer an attractive alternative to religious delusions when it comes to dying. There should be public education on how to best manage one’s end of life. Relationships education and education on dying should go hand in hand, not least because proper awareness of the termination of all individual life is the strongest argument for optimal relationships of love and relationships before one’s life ends.

Yes, dying can be a horrifying experience, full of panic and pain. Therefore, I believe that morphine should be available for those who are dying consciously. Morphine, potentially the most valuable medication of a lifetime, can be the practical answer of science to all the religious blabla of priests at a person’s deathbed.

As an alternative to religious beliefs, a modern society should also work to minimize the occurrence of potential death-in-panic situations. People should have the option to choose unconsciousness for air travel or other activities that are associated with an accident and death-in-panic risk. Providing such practical solutions to the fear of dying can go a long way in pulling the carpet from below the feet of the propagators of religions.

My mantra has two parts, optimal love and relationships, and a comfortable death, but in most of my articles, I deal with optimal love and relationships.

Christian fundamentalists stand in the way of a society in which optimal relationships of love and relationships are rightfully recognized as every human’s primary concern during life.

But Christian fundamentalists also are a political obstruction for the second concern, a comfortable death. They argue against humans taking their deaths into their own hands (not by committing suicide but by engineering its gentleness at the time death occurs), because it cuts into the domain they consider theirs (relief from the fear of dying).

Disclaimer: Statements and products on this page have not undergone the FDA approval process.

Privacy policy of Sumatra Pasak Bumi

For us at Sumatra Pasak Bumi, privacy in the age of the Internet is a major concern, and we greatly welcome the European General Data Protection Regulation GDPR.

We have always been dedicated to privacy protection. The snooping and spooking of all and everybody is a pest. It’s not just the NSA and every large search engine and browser we recommend Duckduckgo for searches and as browser, but even minor businesses that do their databases and customer profiling in hope of McDonald's style do-you-want-fries-with-that cross sales.

We don’t.

We respect the privacy of customers and people visiting our website. Our site is run from a secure socket layer. We do not use cookies. We do not maintain customer accounts for logging in later. Our website is simple html programming, and we don't even use WordPress templates or e-commerce plug-ins. We don't do a newsletter to which customers could subscribe, and we don't even include standard social media buttons that would link visitors of our site to certain Facebook or Twitter profiles.

We prefer communication by email using a gmail account because this is probably still the most private mode of communication Hillary may disagree, and when we have information to disseminate to the public, we just publish it on our website. We do offer the option to communicate with us by chat apps if a site visitor so wishes, but prefer email.